Charlie Hebdo shooting: eleven dead at Paris offices of satirical magazine

Internet police as a consequence of this event is now a fact in Belgium.

People who "liked" (you know, the button) a facebook threat by a radicalised local, now in Syria, will each be investigated by the police. So, the news reports:

Full article: http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/922/Nieuws/...jongeren.dhtml (kindly machine transl., no ENG version, thanks)

Notice the over 700 reactions and I've not read them all, but the first three pages do not seem to show concern over how private data are going to be processed in this investigation, whether consent is required and given by the investigated, and which legislation is being enacted here, if any such is present.

As a background thought to the inappropriateness of such threat of course.

Quote:

---

Posted by Violet

Internet police as a consequence of this event is now a fact in Belgium.

---

Together with the quick end overalll acceptance that the Belgian army should further be allowed to police in the streets.

http://www.lalibre.be/actu/belgique/...70c2c48ad0e12b

Yawns !

http://www.blackkat.net/tintin/wallp...l_1024x768.jpg

Quote:

---

Posted by Jean-Luc

Famous american-jewish historian and critic of Israel, Norman Finkelstein reacts to the motto "Je suis Charlie".

Quote:

---

I am Der Sturmer?

On Wednesday, January 14th, 2015 in Uncategorized.

Norman G. Finkelstein

The Nazi publication Der Sturmer, edited by Julius Streicher, was notorious for its obscene anti-Semitic caricatures.

Imagine if a pair of Jewish brothers, distraught at the death and destruction that had befallen the Jewish people, barged into the newspaper’s offices and murdered members of its staff.

Would we hold up as martyrs and heroes those who chose to mock the deeply held beliefs of a suffering and despised people; to degrade, demean, insult and humiliate Jews in their hour of trial, when the world they had known was disintegrating around them?

Imagine if a million Berliners turned out to mourn the political pornographers.

Would we applaud this display of solidarity?

Streicher was sentenced to death in the Nuremberg Trial.

It is not reported that many in the enlightened West shed tears.

http://normanfinkelstein.com/2015/01...n-der-sturmer/

---

---

I do not claim to have any answers, but as a critic of Israel, you would expect better from Finkelstein; he definitely seems to have got completely the wrong end of the stick this time. Charlie Hebdo is hardly the official press outlet of a fascist state capable of waging a world war and of carrying out genocide to further its agenda, so the comparison is simply grotesque, the reverse of the truth. Likewise it is grotesque to suggest through the perceived or projected parallel with anti-Semitism that Charlie Hebdo is islamophobic or that either of these notions has necessarily anything to do with human individuals and their possible removal. And worse, Finkelstein is talking about state anti-Semitism, where a German citizen could not befriend a Jew without becoming one. The marches in France were made by people tolerant of others’ different views yet walking together to defend their common ground. Only the neo-fascists were conspicuous by their absence.

In terms of religion, a Protestant is historically by definition anti-Catholic: that is what the protest was about; and a Catholic is historically by definition anti-Judaic. That does not stop Christians from being on the whole decent human beings living their lives and letting others live theirs, even though historically they butchered each other for much the same reasons as we are seeing now. Charlie Hebdo is simply anti-religion altogether, anti-clerical, and as such is protected by the nation, which is collectively a secular, i.e. denominationally uncommitted entity. Charlie is also anti-militaristic and most of all anti-fascist. These guys are cartoonists: they draw pictures, for God’s sake, when others use words. Cabu was a virtuoso who could draw behind his back, in the dark or with his pencil in his pocket. Such people are bound to fall foul sooner or later with people whose religions prohibit the use of graven images. You and I are basically free to write what we like about God and his prophets, as long as we aren’t blasphemous, like Salman Rushdie allegedly was. But a cartoonist cannot even do that: the merest depiction, even benevolent, like this week’s Mohammed, is already blasphemous. Given his medium, certain subjects are automatically taboo – in the eyes at least of some outsiders who should really be minding their own business – and hence a taboo that automatically has to be broken, otherwise freedom of expression is thrown out of the window.*

Blasphemy itself is the illegal immigrant in a secular state. It is a foreign concept in a country where any religion and none is acceptable. When France constitutionally ‘respects all beliefs’, that respect is applied in terms of tolerance, not intolerance. Hence the secular state itself is the enemy, because it condones blasphemy by discarding the notion altogether. Which is why the nation, the physical embodiment of the State, took massively and entirely peacefully to the streets. To suggest that it was akin to solidarity with genocidal Nazis is unbelievably mischievous and/or misguided. Whatever take you may have on the events that led up to it, there is no misinterpreting Sunday’s march. Four million people turned out to claim their right to free speech. That was their stated intention, a performative statement whereby they said what they were doing and did what they said. Whatever their customary lukewarm attitude, this was a massive exercise of that right on a scale not seen since 1790. And such an intention, so powerfully stated, cannot fail to achieve concrete results.

* Regarding Ulli’s comment, I posted a thought last week on the Here and Now thread to the effect that a little self-control was no bad thing. The problem here is of course that any form of self-censorship will be seen as caving in to outside censorship, making a mockery of free speech. I have no simple answer to that, except to say that until we stop killing our fellow humans and get to know and understand them better, total frankness is liable to appear unfriendly and counter-productive. Meanwhile, free thinking is probably better applied to less inflammatory material that people can take on board at their own pace. But there again, some governments also feel threatened by that and clamp down on it as well.

Quote:

---

Posted by ulli

For your info, I just came across another version of what happened. Some of it worth considering. Some of it over the top.
Personally, i have never been a Charlie, and even though Muslims killed over 20,000 Bahais
I would not deliberately attack their beliefs system.
Standup comedy and satire, like many other scenes, are going too far, in my view.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=krhKIUp8xT4

But anyone who puts a video on youtube, going through that effort, has a lesser or greater agenda.

---

And hello... hello... what 'ave we 'ere? Came up right after posting the above vid.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post923468

http://www.fotothing.com/photos/0a2/...?ts=1421320755

Quote:

---

For your info, I just came across another version of what happened. Some of it worth considering. Some of it over the top.
Personally, i have never been a Charlie, and even though Muslims killed over 20,000 Bahais
I would not deliberately attack their beliefs system.
Standup comedy and satire, like many other scenes, are going too far, in my view.

---

Interesting take on the situation ,parts of the vid are plausible and
some good points and quotes from press sources. Someone is setting
up these false flags as he says and we have mentioned here. None
of the events since the fall of the Ottoman Empire during WW 1,
which was not perfect but multicultural . Up to last weeks shooting
has benefited many muslim countries , with literally a 100 years of wars
and strife in the Middle East and surrounding area. Except Saudi
Arabia and the Gulf States and what do they have. Stable Royalty & Oil.
Others states have had Royalty and have oil but other circumstances
put them in conflict with western 'Bansters' thus governments
there are other nuances obviously but on the whole 'The War
On Terror' is effecting muslims far more negatively than anyone else.

All of history is a history of false flag operations and Paris looks like another, says Reagan official

Thursday 15th January 2015 at 10:30 By David Icke


http://www.davidicke.com/wordpress/w...35-587x330.jpg


‘The Charlie Hebdo affair has many of the characteristics of a false flag operation. The attack on the cartoonists’
office was a disciplined professional attack of the kind associated with highly trained special forces; yet the
suspects who were later corralled and killed seemed bumbling and unprofessional. It is like two different sets of people.

Usually Muslim terrorists are prepared to die in the attack; yet the two professionals who hit Charlie Hebdo were
determined to escape and succeeded, an amazing feat. Their identity was allegedly established by the claim that
they conveniently left for the authorities their ID in the getaway car.

Such a mistake is inconsistent with the professionalism of the attack and reminds me of the undamaged passport
found miraculously among the ruins of the two WTC towers that served to establish the identity of the alleged 9/11 hijackers.’

Read more: All of history is a history of false flag operations and Paris looks like another, says Reagan official

http://www.prisonplanet.com/charlie-hebdo.html

===================================================


Paris terror attacks: Did the French know about the planned atrocities in advance?

Thursday 15th January 2015 at 10:29 By David Icke


http://www.davidicke.com/wordpress/w...in-587x390.jpg


‘Secret service agents moved in to capture suspected Paris terror fixer Hayat
Boumeddiene – 48 hours BEFORE the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

Turkish intelligence MIT chiefs ordered officers to storm an Istanbul hotel where
she had checked in – but she had gone.

The hotel owner said: “They took everyone out of the hotel. Staff, cleaning ladies,
even customers were taken out of their rooms by the agents.”’

Read more: Paris terror attacks: Did the French know about the planned atrocities in advance?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...h-know-4980655

===================================================

Quote:

---

Posted by araucaria

I do not claim to have any answers, but as a critic of Israel, you would expect better from Finkelstein;

---

Yes indeed, comparaison n'est pas raison. And I agree that this is a little far fetched. Yet, if not a direct tool of some "regime", it can also be considered that through repeated mockery "de bas étage" , it only pushed towards more division and stigmatization of the Muslim world, that serves the interests of some.

Quote:

---

Posted by araucaria

Charlie Hebdo is simply anti-religion altogether, anti-clerical, and as such is protected by the nation, which is collectively a secular, i.e. denominationally uncommitted entity.

---

Yet, claiming that Charlie Hebdo is simply anti-religion calls for some nuances (*). You are aware that, strangely enough, the third monotheist religion on this planet (which it is true should concern very, very few people as compared to the two other ones - and it is obviously no wonder [or alternatively quite amazing] that the three religions of the Book are always set on equal footing) was hardly ever made fun of in this journal in which impartial journalists such as Philippe Val (**) (***) and, what's her name again..., Caroline Fourest (recently condemned for defamation and islamophobia) were on the payroll in a recent past.

(*) « Charlie Hebdo », pas raciste ? Si vous le dites… http://www.article11.info/?Charlie-H...aciste-Si-vous

(**) who as major shareholder made a nice extra little income of 330.000 EUR in 2006 with the sodomized Muhammad "caricatures"
http://www.lemonde.fr/actualite-medi...8244_3236.html

(***) "Du hold-up sur un titre par Philippe Val au détournement de son orientation éditoriale..." http://www.acrimed.org/article2960.html

Quote:

---

Posted by araucaria

When France constitutionally ‘respects all beliefs’, that respect is applied in terms of tolerance, not intolerance.

---

I've always had a problem with the word tolerance.
What does it say about me if "tolerate" my neighbours or if I "respect" my neighbours?
And as you rightly put it, "respect is applied in terms of tolerance". I would prefer that respect is applied in terms of respect. But unfortunately it seems (?) that respect cannot be framed into laws. A useful nuance IMO poorly inspired (however gifted and sometimes funny) people seem to make great use of.

And the definition of respect goes internally to a place that few people go, which is the internal concepts of self and ego. Thus it (attempts at internal musing) always bounces off, or is filtered in it's origins into conscious expression by the internal hindbrain aspects of emotion. The more sure (in the true sense) a person is in self, the more respect is possible, for that person.

Since the average person is not aware and is, for the most part, self blocked as to seeing (being conscious of) the origins of their internal thoughts, the formation of thought, and thus the formation of respect, can be and is manipulated by outside forces (Ie, the human looks out, with no internal rear view mirror). Forces which can be contrived - by dark forces with ulterior motives.

When we look around the world, with the above in mind, this is what can be framed into a basis of fundamentals in societal shapes and processes that are going on at this time.

The fear/survival tool, is the first the dark forces reach for, when they wish to steer populations, as it is the most base component in the origins of conscious thought that flows from an unconscious thinker. (this is only a contradiction of you don't know what it means)

All the rest of the given situation, is just garlands and glitter as cover components to confuse the population from seeing the basic method/tactic that us used against them.

Thank you for your comments Jean-Luc in post #227. Why Judaism does not come in for so much adverse comment is likely to do with the fact that it is a non-proselytizing religion. Religious Jews mind their own business; most complaints being voiced are directed at the small political minority. I see you have added some asterisked comments. I don’t particularly want to defend Charlie Hebdo on every count; that is not the issue. Which is to say that attacking the paper is equally irrelevant, imo.

The word respect itself has two different nuances, one being almost synonymous with tolerate and the other being to hold in high regard. When talking about an abstract entity like the State, I don’t think the latter strong sense is meant, but rather that it is agnostic or neutral with regard to religion and other beliefs. The State has no opinion on any belief, even agnosticism, it simply allows them all up to the point where the law is broken. Whatever term you want to use, for me that is the opposite of what is generally known as (religious) intolerance.

I think tolerating my neighbours, whom I don’t get to choose, says nothing about me – it is only one side of the coin. Obviously friendly relations would be the norm, but in some instances you get people who do not share your values and whom you do not hold in high regard (respect), yet you do what it takes to make life tolerable. Conflicts are usually over observing boundaries, with conflict building bigger fences, with no common ground; good neighbourly relations involve reducing that separation and creating a little common ground without encroachment. To many this comes naturally, but not to all. To some it can easily become ‘my place is my place and your place is my place’.

Let me give you a couple of examples of issues with common space. First take a soccer game: everyone is entitled to stand wherever they like, but in front of goal you have two sides with different agendas (attack and defence) wanting to stand on the same spot. The referee will tolerate a certain amount of pushing and shoving and shirt-pulling, because no one is more entitled than the other; but only so much, because the outcome of the game depends on what happens in this area. None of these things are strictly allowed at all, but bending the rules is fair game to see what you can get away with, and it is no use complaining to the referee. If you don’t like it, then you do something else.

The second example is Chapter 89 of Moby Dick, called ‘Fast-fish and loose-fish’. Below are links to a summary and to the chapter itself. Briefly, a fast-fish is something for which possession is ‘half of the law’, and often ‘the whole of the law’. A loose-fish is up for grabs.

http://www.shmoop.com/moby-dick/chapter-89-summary.html
http://americanliterature.com/author...and-loose-fish

Melville makes clear that the power-grabbers operate on the principle that their fish are fast and anyone else’s are loose. Self-possession in the full sense of the word (self-assurance in Carmody’s post) makes one a fast-fish, ‘at a respectful distance’ as the saying goes. In other words, it takes you out of this game to where you want to be.

Quote:

---

Is it not a saying in every one's mouth, Possession is half of the law: that is, regardless of how the thing came into possession? But often possession is the whole of the law. What are the sinews and souls of Russian serfs and Republican slaves but Fast-Fish, whereof possession is the whole of the law? What to the rapacious landlord is the widow's last mite but a Fast-Fish? What is yonder undetected villain's marble mansion with a doorplate for a waif; what is that but a Fast-Fish? What is the ruinous discount which Mordecai, the broker, gets from the poor Woebegone, the bankrupt, on a loan to keep Woebegone's family from starvation; what is that ruinous discount but a Fast-Fish? What is the Archbishop of Savesoul's income of £100,000 seized from the scant bread and cheese of hundreds of thousands of broken-backed laborers (all sure of heaven without any of Savesoul's help) what is that globular 100,000 but a Fast-Fish. What are the Duke of Dunder's hereditary towns and hamlets but Fast-Fish? What to that redoubted harpooneer, John Bull, is poor Ireland, but a Fast-Fish? What to that apostolic lancer, Brother Jonathan, is Texas but a Fast-Fish? And concerning all these, is not Possession the whole of the law?

But if the doctrine of Fast-Fish be pretty generally applicable, the kindred doctrine of Loose-Fish is still more widely so. That is internationally and universally applicable.

What was America in 1492 but a Loose-Fish, in which Columbus struck the Spanish standard by way of wailing it for his royal master and mistress? What was Poland to the Czar? What Greece to the Turk? What India to England? What at last will Mexico be to the United States? All Loose-Fish.

What are the Rights of Man and the Liberties of the World but Loose-Fish? What all men's minds and opinions but Loose-Fish? What is the principle of religious belief in them but a Loose-Fish? What to the ostentatious smuggling verbalists are the thoughts of thinkers but Loose-Fish? What is the great globe itself but a Loose-Fish? And what are you, reader, but a Loose-Fish and a Fast-Fish, too?

---

Charlie Hebdo has broad shoulders

by Thierry Meyssan

14 January 2015
français Español Portuguêsعربيفارسى

While millions of French just came to stand without hesitation in defense of freedoms of expression and worship, politicians and the press, which one and the other constantly undermine them, have seized the opportunity to recover their virginity. For Thierry Meyssan, the government has led an extensive manipulation to cast itself at the head of a great popular event and is now looking for ways to justify a new military operation in Libya.

http://www.voltairenet.org/local/cac...a276-c46c2.jpg
Fifty Heads of State and Government Participated in the Demonstration.

In three days, in France, a group of four or five people claiming to be both al-Qaeda in Yemen and the Islamic Emirate (Daesh) massacred the editorship of Charlie Hebdo and murdered a municipal police officer and more hostages in three different situations. France, which had not experienced such violence since the attacks of the OAS, over 50 years ago, responded while crying "We are all Charlie!" by shooting three terrorists and organizing a huge demonstration of several million people.

The President of the Republic, François Hollande, hosted the leaders of the political parties represented in Parliament. He appealed to French national unity and attended the event, along with fifty heads of foreign governments.

In a previous article [1], I observed that the mode of operation of the terrorists had nothing to do with that which is practiced by experienced jihadists, but rather resembled that of a military commando. I concluded that, as a result, no matter who they were, the only thing we need to know is who commanded them. I would like, in this second article, to return to the reactions aroused by this case.

The suspension of the right to protest
At the moment of the announcement of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, January 7, 2015 at noon, Prime Minister Manuel Valls decided to implement the Vigipirate attack Plan at Ile-de-France. This comprises a hundred automatic measures and about two hundred other options. Among the chosen measures, the Interior Ministry announced the postponement of all authorized demonstrations. The authorities feared that terrorists might fire on the crowd.

However, a far-left party called to demonstrate immediately in support of Charlie Hebdo. After a few hours of hesitation, the Commissioner of Police authorized a rally that would number 100 000 people. Even stranger: the Prime Minister declared a national day of mourning for the next day, January 8th. Many rallies were organized by government to celebrate a minute of silence. Still more surprising: the Socialist Party called for a broad national demonstration on Sunday the 11th, which attracted more than 2 million people in Paris.

Thus, the government could ban demonstrations because they might be dangerous to their participants, but its members could organize a huge one, inviting leaders of foreign governments without fear for their safety.

This manipulation confirms that, contrary to its declarations, the government knew precisely the extent of the threat and knew it did not concern gatherings.

They thus preferred to retain only this extraordinary popular movement for freedom.

National Union
In this crisis situation, the right and the left agreed to participate together in a national event. But for what values or against whom will they demonstrate?

We discover that the leaders of the left and right shared the anti-religious, anti-national and anti-militarist values of the very leftist Charlie Hebdo. We knew that its founder, Philippe Val, was a friend of the Sarkozys. Suddenly we discover that its new manager, Charb, was the companion of a right-wing minister, Jeannette Bougrab.

The latter was the guest of TF1’s journal. Very moved, she tells of her love. Then she presents Charb’s anti-religious convictions as a secular commitment in the face of Islamism, before comparing her friend to Jean Moulin and requesting that he be buried with him in the Pantheon. She ends by revealing that the couple had thought to leave France and start a new life elsewhere. We are left stunned. In a few words, Jeannette Bougrab just showed her contempt for her fellow citizens, assimilated secularism to the anti-religious struggle and put an anti-national comedian on an equal footing with the founder of the National Council of the the Resistance. The Charb family may well protest as it will but doubt has been cast.

And so that we may well understand what is the "national union", seen from the right and the left, socialist leaders declared that the National Front would be excluded from the "republican" demonstration. Have we really understood the enormity of the proposal? Political leaders evoke the Republic to exclude their rivals. Ultimately, the FN joined demonstrations in the provinces.

The International Union
By inviting all sorts of Heads of State and government leaders to open the event with him, President Hollande intended to give it an air of solemnity.

Among these present, one counted David Cameron and Benjamin Netanyahu, whose states wield omnipotent military censorship; or again the US Secretary of Justice, Eric Holder, whose country loves freedom of expression so much that it bombed and destroyed numerous TV stations from that of Belgrade to the Libyan networks; Turkish Prime Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, whose country banned the construction of Christian churches (even if it seems set to soon authorize one); or again Benjamin Netanyahu who congratulated al-Qaeda fighters treated in Israeli hospitals; once again without forgetting Eric Holder, Ahmet Davutoğlu and King Abdullah of Jordan, whose States reorganized Daesh in January, 2014.

So what were these folks doing in Paris? Certainly not defending freedom of expression and worship which they actually fight.

Freedom of expression
It’s not only the political class that took the opportunity hog the blankets. So did the press. It sees in Charlie Hebdo an example of the very freedom of press it keeps trampling, self-censoring constantly and always showing solidarity with crimes committed abroad by the government.

The French press is indeed numerous, but extremely conformist and therefore not pluralistic. This is so right up to the unanimity with which it presents Charlie Hebdo. For, contrary to what it claims, the satirical newspaper proclaimed its opposition to freedom of expression, notably when it was petitionning to ban the National Front or campaigning for censorship of the internet.

Anyway, we can only be grateful that the press has finally come to the defense of those who are attacked for what they have said.

About the jihadist trail
Continuing its investigation in the wrong direction, the press provides a profile of terrorists and forgets to look into their sponsors. Without cracking a smile, it explained that this wave of attacks is a collaboration between al-Qaeda members in Yemen and Daesh, even though the two organizations have been engaged for a year in a fierce war that has killed at least 3,000 victims in both camps.

On this subject, I am surprised at these references; we should soon find a new one that connects the attack to Libya. Indeed, if François Hollande follows in the footsteps of George W. Bush, he should attack Yemen although France has no great advantage in such a project. However her personal chief of staff, General Puga, is preparing a new military intervention in Libya.

This target is much more logical. France could then reap the benefits that it hoped to obtain from its first intervention. And it would end the US project of remodeling the "Broader Middle East" as published by Robin Wright in The New York Times in September, 2013 [2] and begun by Daesh in Iraq and Syria.

Thierry Meyssan

Translation
Roger Lagassé

Breaking news: three dead in anti-terror operation in Verviers (BE). It's not directly related to the topic but the media are making these links. It's one thing after the other since Charlie:

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20150115_01475736 (Dutch only)
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News...-Verviers.html (English)
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...615645,00.html (English)

Update:

Press-conference just corrected the number to 2 dead suspects of terrorism instead of 3.

Thousands of years from now when intelligent beings visit this planet and wonder why the human species went extinct, they'll find fragments from articles like this and come to the conclusion that our species simply just became complete idiots and went insane and because of idiotic and insane behavior the humans species went extinct because they were just too stupid to survive.....

Oxford University warns authors not to write about bacon, pork to avoid offending Muslims

Quote:

---

Posted by SilentFeathers

Thousands of years from now when intelligent beings visit this planet and wonder why the human species went extinct, they'll find fragments from articles like this and come to the conclusion that our species simply just became complete idiots and went insane and because of idiotic and insane behavior the humans species went extinct because they were just too stupid to survive.....

Oxford University warns authors not to write about bacon, pork to avoid offending Muslims

---

And probably the most insane part of that story being that muslims and jews themselves did not ask for the pork censuring.

Maybe we should make it an offence to take offence. A little fine each time would soon sort out the economy.

I'm figuring "they'll" come up with a mandatory vaccine for the global population that will make us more tolerant of our idiotic petty differences!

Quote:

---

Posted by SilentFeathers

I'm figuring "they'll" come up with a mandatory vaccine for the global population that will make us more tolerant of our idiotic petty differences!

---

It's on its way. Can no one reading this thread make any hands-on contribution to this dire situation?

Quote:

---

Posted by Carmody

Fukushima radioactive waste water treatment technique:

This SHOULD work, and work well. The experiment merely needs to be done. Apologies for taking so long for this to form itself properly in the back of my noggin, it finally fell out in complete form, today.

~~~~~~~~~~

Take about a 1:1 ratio of microscopic iron, and microscopic aluminum. Mix the powders together. If mixing the powders together is a problem..which it will be...mix it into water, each component at a time, into water. maybe 10:1 with water, have the micro iron and the micro aluminum mix thoroughly in the water. Then fully dilute into maybe 100:1 via mass.

100kg of water, 1-2-3 kg of 1:1 micro aluminum/micro iron mix. It has to be micro, or better (finer particles), so it suspends in the water. Basically, you want nano aluminum and nano iron in the water, down to the chemical dispersion level. Together, in the water, at the molecular level.

Pour this into a mixture of the radioactive water. About 100kg of rad waste water, per 100 kg of water/iron/aluminum mix. (total mass of the mix is now 202kg (approx)

Run a Rhodes gas flame (aka :"brown's gas", aka "HHO gas") THROUGH the radioactive water. Repeatedly. Over and over. Repeatedly, in a continual run, ie, maybe 3-4-5 runs through.

This will require a maybe 4000L/Hr browns gas generator. You want lots of browns gas 'flame' bubbling through the mixture, lots of browns gas reacting with the water. The water will not heat up, it will not even boil, it will not reach 100 degrees Celsius.

Measure the residual radiation after a few cycles. Fine tune the mixtures and technique.

The radiation should drop to near unmeasurable levels.

That's the recipe for decontaminating the radioactive waste water.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Scale it up, for a few million dollars... and in a few months, all of that radioactive waste water should be treated, and have zero residual radiation.

Another potential way to do it, is to put the micro aluminum and the micro iron mix in the water and go for Ultrasonic cavitation, micro implosions in the water, which are electrical, and same-same as the brown's gas effect, in this case.

This mess has been solvable for a LONG time, ways of doing so have been known long before this mess even began. I'm sure that the black parts of certain governments know better ways than this.

Please understand that the technique of radiation reduction via brown's gas and aluminum/iron powders..was proven conclusively by the official Canadian government offices and official representatives of said outfit...at Chalk River Laboratories, at the town of Chalk River. The video tape of it being done is available on the internet.

This proposed technique, is a modification of their 'tested and found to be effective' technique. The Chalk River Labs did not find or discover the original radiation reduction technique, it was brought them ...and they conducted official works based on it.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...boratories.jpg

it makes you wonder.....

(I personally own a 1600L/Hr browns gas generator and have played with similar techniques, but not radiation issues. I'm not talking out of an uneducated and uninformed butt here, my understandings are real, and my experience is direct and hands on.)

Please repost anywhere you can think of, get this message out there.

---

Quote:

---

Posted by Jean-Luc

Quote:

---

Posted by naste.de.lumina

The origin of the smoke.
Source: http://forum.antinovaordemmundial.co...t.php?aid=2925

---

This hypothesis indeed makes sense and deserves more attention.

Here is the view again.

Attachment 28629

I really looks like the cop on the pavement has something shiny in the hand.
Could indeed be a spray.

Any doubts ? Give it a try and see for yourself what happens to the top left image once your change luminosity and contrast.

---

In this video we can see better than the smoke originates from the left hand of the police.
It may sound ridiculous but the reality is what it is

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=JXrKEd9zlJw

While Charlie Hebdo affair comes to an end , we see flourish on internet conspiracy numerous articles and videos that attempt to demonstrate that this is all a conspiracy orchestrated by political (mysterieuses et occultes institutions). My first reaction is to laugh when I see all these ballistics expert users (but obviously not spelling ) who are able to recognize the sound of a Kalashnikov by their great military experience, tell us how much blood would spurt out of the head cop when he was shot down? Different mirror on the car ? UHh! More and more fake vids from USA, Russia etc.

In reality there is no invincible hero,no evil conspiracies. Just humans who act like they can, but are subject to Murphy's Law, their mortality, their fears and their intellectual limits. I am disgusted to see all the killings in the name of a dogma or ideology.

Islamism was not always the upper hand in terms of terrorism.

A gunman claiming to be armed with a Kalashnikov and grenades has taken two people hostage at post office in a Paris suburb.
Police have surrounded the building in Colombes, around seven miles from the centre of the French capital. A helicopter was flying overhead.
The gunman reportedly phoned police to confirm that he had taken hostages in the post office on 158 boulevard du general de Gaulle.
Two captives are understood to have already been released, according to French media.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz3OzZz7UbY
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...st-office.html

This is getting ridiculous...